UPDATE Sept 2021: I have come to believe that Jeff Crippen does not practise what he preaches. He vilely persecuted an abuse victim and spiritually abused many other people in the Tillamook congregation. Go here to read the evidence. Jeff has not gone to the people that he spiritually and emotionally abused. He has not apologised to them, let alone asked for their forgiveness.
***
Now Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, was judging Israel at that time. She used to sit under the palm of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in the hill country of Ephraim, and the people of Israel came up to her for judgment. (Jdg 4:4-5)
I am no expert on the era of the Judges and I do not claim to know with certainty why a woman, Deborah, was chosen by the Lord to be the judge of the nation in those days. I do know that it was a dark time “when every man did what was right in his own eyes.” But certainly one explanation could be that the men of the nation had forfeited their right and duty to lead.
Sin in the life of a leader in the household of God can mean forfeiture of his position of leadership. God could have removed David as king, though for His glory and His faithfulness to His covenant, He did not. In Saul’s case, kingship was removed. And so it had been in the history of the kings of Israel.
Recently I read an article by the boys over at The Gospel Coalition, for whom I have little respect. I do not respect them because they continue to rally to each other’s case when one of their “buds” is in trouble. See the whole CJ Mahaney, SGM fiasco as an example. TGC fellows have been sounding the “anti-abuse” trumpet lately it seems to me, and in this article I just read you have them going on and on about how the Bible and Jesus in particular show the value of women.
It is true that the Bible and Jesus in particular show the value of women. Jesus highly valued women and the examples given in the TGC article are accurate. Then the article moves on to its main point — complementarianism. Men are to be the leaders in the church, in the marriage, in the family, and so on. I don’t want to get into that whole debate here. I hate people demanding that I embrace the label “complementarian” or “egalitarian” for myself. I prefer to say “I believe what the Bible teaches about men and women and marriage and family and church.”
My point here is this. Ok, let’s say that the Bible teaches that men are to be pastors and elders in the church, not women. And that men are to be the leaders in their marriage and in their home. That women, all things being equal, are not to be in those positions. Then here is my challenge to the men.
My challenge to men who affirm complementarianism
Why should the Lord continue to entrust any man with the oversight of Christ’s church when that man continues to cover for and enable wicked abusers? What makes you so certain that the Lord would not appoint a godly woman in the place of such an ungodly man? It is evident and plain for anyone who has eyes to see and ears to hear that evil, wicked, oppressive abuse IS being enabled and covered for by church leaders, many if not most of whom are men. Do you really think that male leadership in the church is more important to the Lord than justice and mercy and courageous defense of the oppressed? Do you think that the Lord would rather have a “good ‘ol boy” who protects evildoers leading His flock than a woman who is a true daughter of Abraham?
Evil, power-and-control hungry, wicked men ARE being protected and covered for in many if not most local churches. Those who want to deny that, well, we have nothing to say to you as long as you choose willful blindness. Will the Lord be with any such “shepherd” who feeds himself and not Christ’s lambs? Of course not. To the boys at TGC and really to all men who are leaders in the church and who protect abusers and add to the oppression of victims, I say: You should take a very hard look at yourself and your ministry to see if the glory of the Lord has not already departed from you and that shepherds after His own heart are not being raised up elsewhere in places you might never even think to look. You may well find yourself and your ministry “Ichabod.”
And then one final note. Just because a woman is a woman does not guarantee that she will be a friend to the oppressed. Notice that in my above statements I specified that the Lord may use a GODLY woman — a woman who truly knows Christ and who knows His Word and possesses His wisdom. Many women, like many men, do not, as is evidenced of late by the numerous comments on our Facebook posts regarding a highly publicized abuser. Many of those abusive comments which sided with the abuser were made by women.
If the Lord does raise up a woman to lead, she will most certainly be a woman like Deborah, full of His Spirit and His wisdom. One of the chief signs that she has those qualities is how she responds to evil and the victims of evil.
***
Note from Barb: Psalm 68:11 says
The Lord announces the word, and the women who proclaim it are a mighty throng (NIV)
The Lord gives the word; the women who announce the news are a great host (ESV)
The Lord gave the command; a great company of women brought the good news (HCSB)
***
A Cry For Justice 
The term “leadership” is so abused today that I wouldn’t care if I never heard the term again. People who are controllers want it and abuse it. People who are shining examples don’t want it. Each of us could follow Jesus in a strong but servant type way… tough and tender love..
Good point, Sarah. I also find myself cringing at using the term “headship” anymore, even though Scripture certainly does teach a doctrine of Christ as Head of the church, husband as head of the wife and we know that its true meaning is good and wholesome. But that fact has been so widely distorted by evildoers that I don’t think I can just use the term and throw it out there without carefully specifying what it does NOT mean. Interesting that other biblical terms aren’t favored so much, like “servant, service, example” and so forth.
The word ‘headship’ is not in the Bible. The Bible simply uses the word ‘head’.
The word headship is a human invention, and IMO it is used in Christian circles to make the assumption of male privilege sound more authentic, solid, orthodox, than it really is.
Exactly right Barbara. Thank you
Thanks Barbara!
Good post, Jeff!
Yet another example of people getting so hung up on their particular brand of legalism that they can’t see the forest for the trees. “Like whitewashed tombs…” they focus on their understanding of outward conformance to scripture while completely missing the heart of God.
Unfortunately, in my experience, women in leadership cover up abuse just as readily as men. I think it’s a church wide problem.
Anonymous – that is a VERY accurate statement. Thank you. Yes, all we need do is go back through the stories and comments so many victims have shared here at ACFJ and the thing is proved. Pastors’ wives, wives of other church leaders, church “pillars” who are women, soooo often enable the abuser and increase the suffering of the abuse victim. It’s like if they admit that the victim is really being abused and that she has the right to get free, then their whole system of what they think Christianity is will come tumbling down.
I’ve had that experience too. It IS a church-wide problem.
Women often help perpetuate the culture of oppression. Christian women as well as men hammering Naghmeh Abedini when she spoke about how Saeed had threatened her and abused porn. Older women doing FGM (female genital mutilation) on their daughters and grand-daughters in some African cultures. Mothers binding their baby daughters’ feet in China for centuries. …
Women on the internet have a choice, but in Africa it’s not clear to me if the women want to abuse their daughters or if they feel forced to by the men of the tribe. 😦
I am not an expert on FGM, but I think that the women who do it on girls do so because they feel forced to do so – they believe it is right. The culture expects it, the men expect it, if a girl doesn’t have it done she is stigmatized.
So even though the women who perform the procedure do it because they say they are freely choosing to and wanting to, the big picture is that the culture would not expect and subtly coerce it unless the underlying ideas of male privilege were driving it.
Thank you. The men are always telling the women that their suffering is for their sins, well maybe Saeed got a taste of his own medicine. Nothing like persecution to cleanse the church. Hope it helped him.
God will not use any person who demands control over another human being.
The world is full of this evil.
Jesus was a servant.. first.
Now He rules nations.
Humility is a choice. Not a privilege. God use me .. a broken vessel.
I love those questions!! It’s issues like those which make it hard for me to read what the Bible says about female submission. At least the Bible has a lot more to say about men loving and serving than what some churches do (and it doesn’t make sense for churches to ignore loving and serving).
Lately I was thinking about the context of difficult verses. 1 Cor 7:38 seems to say it’s most godly for women to stay single and 1 Tim 5:14 seems to say it’s most godly for women to marry and have babies, babies, babies. A harsh interpretation is that women who are married with no children aren’t pleasing God but a context based interpretation would say that Timothy is saying the cultural equivalent of “get a job and stop mooching”. I think 1 Cor 7 is in the context of persecution. Please feel free to let me know if you know more about the context. But I think the Bible is not giving a one-size-fits-all answer about who should marry and how many children. In the same way I wonder what the cultural context was when Titus said that unsubmissive wives malign the word of God. Why didn’t he say that abusive husbands malign the word of God?
1 Timothy 3:2a says: ‘an overseer must be above reproach’. When I looked up the meaning of and synonyms for ‘above reproach’ I saw it explained as ‘such that no criticism can be made’ ‘blameless, above suspicion, without fault’. I didn’t find ‘looking after your mate, turning a blind eye to abuse, blaming the abused not the abuser’ listed. If an elder is not ‘above reproach’ then they should be removed from office not rewarded for their bad behaviour.
Could someone explain exactly what complementarianism is? I am a little bit confused.
Complementarianism is the belief the Bible teaches that leadership is male: that men should lead in the church and the home.
Someone may want to offer a better definition, but that’s my summary of it.
If you want to learn more about what complementarianism is look up The Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. Those who oppose complementarianism are generally known as egalitarians, but I know some who call themselves ‘casteless Christians’. To learn about egalitarianism, look up Christians for Biblical Equality. Or Marg Mowczko
Hi womenforchrist1 🙂 Welcome to the blog!
It’s nice to see you here. 🙂
(((hugs))) from Barb
Thanks Barb. We talked on the phone a number of months ago and you recommended that I look at your blog. I have finally gotten around to doing so, and have greatly enjoyed what I have seen so far.
Terrific! Yes, I can see your email address at the back of the blog, and I recognised it was you. 🙂
You have a good memory. 🙂
So here is an interesting connection. The church I work for is a mega-church with multiple campuses. When I was on-boarded, it was carefully explained to me that it was the policy of the church that any person wishing to serve in any capacity undergo a background check (at the cost of the church). I was then given an impressive story about how they “caught” a guy because he was new to the church and very interested in serving in the nursery…but refused to have a background check run. This didn’t sit well with them and when they refused to let him serve in the children’s wing – he left the church. Good for them.
They have also gotten red flags on a few people who have filled out the BG check. These are confidentially approved by an internal person on the leadership team who approves or rejects these individuals on a case-by-case scenario depending on what was flagged on the report and what position the person is interested in serving (exposure to minors being a big consideration). Again, Good for them.
Last month, while doing a some reconstruction and file clean-up in our database – I noticed that over 100 of the volunteers serving in our department (Worship Arts) did not have a background check present in their file. Tech was the biggest offender, meaning that there are several minors actively serving on the tech team…while the Tech Team adults have no BG done. And the demographic present on the Tech Team is mostly single men. Whoa! Red flag.
Choir, orchestra, band – are also lacking. While they don’t always have minors in serving positions, they do rub shoulders with Tech and they integrate with the children’s choir for special services from time to time. So, no one in my department is off the hook…in my opinion. Plus, there’s the policy.
I launched into an initiative to recover the lost BG checks that should’ve been done. A massive undertaking. Emails were sent. Embedded links to the online form. Hand-holding to help volunteers fill out the online form. Paper copies were sent out.
Almost immediately, the Serving Pastor calls me: “Why are you doing this? We are getting complaints from some of the volunteers; they’re confused.” I refer to the policy I was told. The pastor then tells me, it’s not really a policy per se…and most of these people were grandfathered in – so they are kind of exempt. I was floored. The pastor goes on to say that updating the “grandfathered” files was something administration was considering but hadn’t made a decision about. Still, it shouldn’t be a problem if I want to pursue it. Yes, yes I do want to pursue it. And the conversation ended.
I got another email today from this same Serving Pastor asking me to clarify, exactly, why I am requiring the worship arts volunteers to submit BG checks. I outlined for the pastor the same details I set forth above, including exposure to minors within the ministry.
I feel like I’m being attacked for a “policy” the church supposedly has…or doesn’t. The bottom line is: the church and its pastors / leadership should stand by the policy for all the right reasons regardless of the effort and work involved to obtain the documents. And all of us here know why: if there ever was a victim…and that victim discovered that the church – and by default the leadership / pastors – did NOT do its due diligence in submitting a BG Check on ALL volunteers in serving positions it would add tremendously to that victim’s pain and suffering…and that of the victim’s family. The questions of “Why not?” would echo resoundingly in the hallways and surrounding community. Further, there would most certainly be litigation (that could’ve been avoided) due to negligence. The church would now be liable for the abuse that happened because it didn’t follow protocol. It would devastate both: the life of the victim and the future of the church / pastors / leaders.
No one wants that. No one. Not me. I’m forging ahead.
Good precaution Charis,
The only ones that may have a problem taking it, would be the ones that most likely have something to hide.
Otherwise it is protection for the minors, and the church members.
When an organization is inconsistent in following their own written policies, it leaves them wide open to potential lawsuits for prejudice. If some people are required to have background checks and others are not, that leaves those required to have background checks with a potential valid claim of prejudiced treatment and / or harassment.
The church needs to consistently follow their own written policies for their own legal protection.
It’s just like most security cameras, there for the looks.
I think it’s interesting that you used Deborah as an example. It reminded me of a Bible study I did years ago when I was first coming out of the fog. The premise of the study was that God used Deborah as a helper to Barak so that he could lead. It goes to show that some men won’t accept a woman having any worth other than assisting a man that they so easily interpret Scripture to suit their entitlement.
Dear survivingfreedom, it sounds like they didn’t read verse 9 of Judges 4. 🙂
Surviving Freedom, it seems to me that Deborah was the judge of Israel at the time, and Barak the commander of the army. Each one led in their God appointed field, and it is obvious that Barak was a weak leader since he asked for Deborah’s support to exhort with her presence the soldiers to go into battle. He lacked faith to go on his own.
Another prophetess worth noting is Huldah whom young king Josiah listened to when her words were brought back to him by the priest and several counselors (2 Kings 22).
I so often have heard men –even some women– comment that women sadly are taking the lead in church but they refuse to see that, like Adam, they do not take their responsibilities as leaders in the first place! But worse they do not even understand what leading truly means, especially Eph 5.25-27 i.e. being a humble and obedient servant to the will of the Father. While Jesus washed his disciples feet to show them what serving was they were disputing who was the greatest among them. So are the church leaders doing today while wolves and lions are ravening the sheep… 😦
I wonder if part of the problem with ungodly “leadership” in the church today is that so many churches are run more like businesses than the body of Christ? In my former church, the wealthiest businessman in the congregation is the Treasurer and a Ruling Elder, while the other elders are all very prominent men (and not necessarily the most Biblically-qualified men). The leaders seem to gather to themselves men who have the most prestige, money and power and the church ends up looking more like a tightly-run business with all its programs, “ministries,” and formulas for who, what and where. The end result is that if your husband just so happens to fill an important or needed role in the church, like mine did, then so long as he’s doing his “job” and looks good doing it, then the leaders are less apt to take action.
So here is an interesting connection. The church I work for is a mega-church with multiple campuses. When I was on-boarded, it was carefully explained to me that it was the policy of the church that any person wishing to serve in any capacity undergo a background check (at the cost of the church). I was then given an impressive story about how they “caught” a guy because he was new to the church and very interested in serving in the nursery…but refused to have a background check run. This didn’t sit well with them and when they refused to let him serve in the children’s wing – he left the church. Good for them.
They have also gotten red flags on a few people who have filled out the BG check. These are confidentially approved by an internal person on the leadership team who approves or rejects these individuals on a case-by-case scenario depending on what was flagged on the report and what position the person is interested in serving (exposure to minors being a big consideration). Again, Good for them.
Last month, while doing a some reconstruction and file clean-up in our database – I noticed that over 100 of the volunteers serving in our department (Worship Arts) did not have a background check present in their file. Tech was the biggest offender, meaning that there are several minors actively serving on the tech team…while the Tech Team adults have no BG done. And the demographic present on the Tech Team is mostly single men. Whoa! Red flag.
Choir, orchestra, band – are also lacking. While they don’t always have minors in serving positions, they do rub shoulders with Tech and they integrate with the children’s choir for special services from time to time. So, no one in my department is off the hook…in my opinion. Plus, there’s the policy.
I launched into an initiative to recover the lost BG checks that should’ve been done. A massive undertaking. Emails were sent. Embedded links to the online form. Hand-holding to help volunteers fill out the online form. Paper copies were sent out.
Almost immediately, the Serving Pastor calls me: “Why are you doing this? We are getting complaints from some of the volunteers; they’re confused.” I refer to the policy I was told. The pastor then tells me, it’s not really a policy per se…and most of these people were grandfathered in – so they are kind of exempt. I was floored. The pastor goes on to say that updating the “grandfathered” files was something administration was considering but hadn’t made a decision about. Still, it shouldn’t be a problem if I want to pursue it. Yes, yes I do want to pursue it. And the conversation ended.
I got another email today from this same Serving Pastor asking me to clarify, exactly, why I am requiring the worship arts volunteers to submit BG checks. I outlined for the pastor the same details I set forth above, including exposure to minors within the ministry.
I feel like I’m being attacked for a “policy” the church supposedly has…or doesn’t. The bottom line is: the church and its pastors / leadership should stand by the policy for all the right reasons regardless of the effort and work involved to obtain the documents. And all of us here know why: if there ever was a victim…and that victim discovered that the church – and by default the leadership / pastors – did NOT do its due diligence in submitting a BG Check on ALL volunteers in serving positions it would add tremendously to that victim’s pain and suffering…and that of the victim’s family. The questions of “Why not?” would echo resoundingly in the hallways and surrounding community. Further, there would most certainly be litigation (that could’ve been avoided) due to negligence. The church would now be liable for the abuse that happened because it didn’t follow protocol. It would devastate both: the life of the victim and the future of the church / pastors / leaders.
No one wants that. No one. Not me. I’m forging ahead.
It seems like the serving-pastor should know WHY this needs to be done BUT even if he doesn’t and isn’t hip to all the child-sexual abuse that’s taken place by pedophiles hiding in the church, now that he’s been informed, he should actually step-up and help you or assign others to help you get all the unregistered volunteers registered. This would be the right response.
I’m curious to see how this unfolds. Please keep us informed on what ensues after this. My prayers are with you. Who knows, maybe if this man doesn’t help, others will. Sometimes God gives us a chance to be surprised at who steps-up to help in times like this. Thank you for sharing this.
There are 17 pastors at my central campus, two of whom are women – and the Serving Pastor is one of those women. One would hope that the women would be advocates and “get it” more than the men. As Jeff pointed out in the article, when it comes to gender and leadership, that is not always so and in this instance – sadly it bears out his point.
My dad once commented that he did not believe women made good managers of other women. It grated with me. As a women, I felt for sure he must be wrong! I have to say, though, that after having worked as a nurse in a female dominated top-down management environment – he is not altogether incorrect.
The floor politics and cultural environment in acute care hospitals is such that the phrase “We eat our young” can be quite descriptive. It is often openly hostile, aggressive, bullying and negatively competitive among staff. Shift managers berate the seasoned, the seasoned bully the rookies, the rookies smear the nurse extenders (aids, housekeeping, ancillary depts, etc). And it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. As this year rookie “graduates” to a more seasoned preceptor – she remembers her rookie status. She recalls how horribly she was treated and in that instant, she has a choice. She can turn the tide or succumb to it. Most times, she caves. Why? Because now is her moment to make someone else pay, because that is “rite of passage” in earning your keep. Hospitals with this type of cultural environment have no true sense of community, of team work, of sacrifice, of care. And, unfortunately, those who truly suffer are the patients and their families. This environment is primarily why nurses switch floors, switch hospitals…or leave nursing altogether.
There is a distinct difference when one finds a manager and a floor where this hostile environment does not exist. Where the culture of the floor, promoted by the example of the manager, is one of caring teamwork, sacrifice, and pulling together. It can be palpably felt on the floors and usually prompts a friendly competition with a neighboring floor: “We want to be the best, friendliest, most caring floor to work for.” Often, the whole hospital has this same culture (to one degree or another) – it’s part of their reputation. When this environment pervades the hospital, patients and their families benefit because patient care, safety, and the standard of excellence skyrocket. The hospital benefits because nurses stay on board much longer – they retire rather than move. Nurses know – because they have experienced for themselves by the example of their manager – that they are cared for by the leadership. They matter.
If only the church leadership would learn the hard lessons that healthcare has learned.
Yes yes yes. Having worked as a casual nurse in many wards of the one hospital, I have seen this. Each ward had a different culture. The culture was persistent over years, even though the personnel would change. It was uncanny.
Tip: in Australian health system, our health insurance applies across the board whatever facility or doctor you attend. If you live in a city where there is a choice of hospital and therefore a choice of emergency departments, ask the ambulance officers which ED dept they would prefer to be taken to if they had an accident. They will tell you. The answer I got when I asked in my city was — hospital A has the best (least bullying, most caring) ED Dept. But if you have a heart condition, go to Hospital B. They gave the answer instantly, they didn’t have to think about it.
Charis and Barbara–your comments were very timely in my life. They both apply to what I’m dealing with and you both confirmed many observations I’ve made about the healthcare system.
What you said Charis about women not being good managers of other women–I agree with you and had previously wondered why this was. Now that I know about psychopathy, my dealings with psychopathic women (and men) have changed. I have learned to treat them as I would one who is demon-possessed–realizing that I am NOT dealing with a person who can relate to others in a “positive” (for lack of a more descriptive word) way and instead as someone I need to pray for my protection against and someone who will lie and shift-shape and harm me if given the chance. I remind myself that I belong to the Lord and that HE is really the only one who can “handle” this person, and I have learned to set boundaries, to be firm, and to keep them at arm’s length, whenever possible.
The US’s healthcare system is supposedly going to start reimbursing hospitals based on customer (patient) satisfaction, so technically, they won’t get paid if they are mean to their patients. We all know that evil ones always find a way around these things so I doubt it’ll help everyone, but hopefully it will improve things.
I actually come from a large family of psychopaths with many more females than males, but until I was allowed to put a name and a description to what they were, I couldn’t understand why they behaved the way that they did. The “good” thing about this now is that I have many examples of the many ways women can display psychopathy and it has helped me “get there faster” figuring out what is going on. Female psychopaths often display / manipulate very differently than men (maybe not in the prison system) and this may be in large part due to society viewing women as nurturers. The women in my family are just as you described Charis–they eat their young. They HATE their children but for some reason (cult teaching being a large part of it) they wanted to have lots of them. Some are more “primitive” in their abuse (physical) whereas the more educated among them have learned to use the current system of child-rearing to abuse them. (e.g. starving them but using “being healthy” as their excuse, or saying they don’t want to raise “self-entitled” children as an excuse for not paying for their college. The kids are then unable to receive financial aid because their parents make too much money. Evil ones always find a way to abuse.)
Thank you both for sharing and giving me a chance to write this–I always pray it helps one of God’s little ones.
Healthcare sigh. Although I’ve meet some compassionate people in healthcare it seems that there aren’t enough of them to make the whole system compassionate. I’ve heard way too many stories (including some of my own) of healthcare being uncaring. 😦 Part of the problem seems to be that there’s not enough doctors to fill all the openings so hospital and clinic administrators have to choose between tolerating some level of abuse (by not firing certain doctors) and not meeting the patient’s physical needs (if they do fire doctors). Usually physical abuse isn’t tolerated, but verbal and covert abuse is. With that dynamic at the top, it’s no wonder that people at the bottom have very negative attitudes. It looks like it’s easier to make a group of people uncaring than to makes them caring. I try to be a caring example at work and I don’t see any obvious evidence that it makes other people want to do the same (besides those who were caring to begin with). If I think about switching employers I fear that the next place will be worse. Some of my coworkers are caring enough to make my job worthwhile, but the bad ones won’t admit that they are the reason for some people’s leaving. And my health insurance has gotten more and more restrictive so I can only get care within 30ish miles of my home. Fine unless I develop a rare condition or take a vacation. I’m grateful that I’m not living in a mud hut in a remote desert, but I’m not optimistic about the system.
Anonymous is correct that patient satisfaction is part of the proposed changes in reimbursement, but that’s only part of it. It is also proposed that hospitals be rated by outcomes-how many patients recover well and don’t need to come back. That’s only good as far as it pushes for the doctor to give good care when the patient is present. It becomes abusive to caregivers when doctors and organizations are punished for accepting complicated chronic patients or are punished for that patient’s choice not to comply with treatment after discharge. It makes me want to leave the US until I remember that other countries might be worse. I just don’t know what it’s like elsewhere. It’s more disheartening to see uncaringness in healthcare than to see it in places you expect it (like big banks).
Anonymous, I’d also like to let you know something related to your comment about the kids whose parents won’t pay for college. As of a few years ago in the US, Federal Aid was (is still?) only based on the parent’s income until the child is around 23ish years old. If those kids become seriously self-motivated, they may be able to work low income jobs for a few years and then get Federal Aid based on their own incomes.
Also, I like what E said. Christians who don’t want tyrannical government shouldn’t ignore tyrannical churches. I don’t want tyrannical either (government or church)!!
Replying to M&M–yes, I’m currently in the college system myself and hear it from many students–the in’s and out’s of federal aid. There are also many great scholarships to be had and at the college I’m currently attending, and a student only needs to fill out one on-line application and they’re submitted for ALL the different scholarships offered through the school.
What I was referring to were parents that I know personally who have plenty of money but refuse to help their children out at all financially. There are several of them in my family and they do it as a way to undermine their children and to ultimately abuse and bad-mouth them later in life for failing. It’s a sad pattern in our family. It’s all about control, manipulation and power. Many of these children have come out of abusive, chaotic childhoods–many have been sexually abused by the men that the unloving women allowed in their children’s lives and then the older children molested the younger children etc. This has happened to MANY in my family because there are so many psychopaths who don’t love or care about others.
Thanks for letting me explain more plainly….it may help others see patterns of abuse in their family as well. Many people are done with college by age 23 so it still puts them behind doesn’t it? And many times the PTSD from the abusive childhoods makes these kids already so worn out, then living hand-to-mouth for years waiting for financial aid can make them give up hope and just quit or become alcoholics or drug-addicts. Like I said, in my family, it’s a deliberate act of control and abuse.
Dear Anonymous, yes you are very welcome to keep sharing. 🙂 And you are very right that it’s hard to go to college with such emotional distress :(. In some states, young adults have the right to prosecute parents for child abuse that no one reported for them during their childhood. I hope some victims feel empowered by that, but I realize that many will feel like they don’t want to face the trauma and/or don’t have enough evidence. There’s no easy way to stop psychopaths. 😦 😦 😦
Thank you, Matthew Henry, from Vol. III of the full commentary of Psalm 68:11: “prophets and prophetesses, the word is feminine…”
We hear Christians rail against the tyranny of the state or federal government, while tolerating it in our homes and churches. I do not believe God will move on our behalf in wider spheres of influence until we learn to recognize and deal with our immediate ones, and THEN, perhaps we will see in our children’s day, a victory against other arenas.
Yes and it is interesting because I have just become acquainted with the whole CJ Mahaney, Mark Driscoll, Tullian Tchividjian, Doug Phillips, Bill Gothard et al ad nauseum scandals. So I am seeing both the fallout and the damage control at the same time instead of seeing it progressively appear and it is quite traumatizing and I am quite angry. Cynthia Kunsman’s reference to a lot of little incidences in and of themselves not seeming alarming but putting them all together, you can see a pattern of spiritual abuse. I know I’m not quoting it correctly. Now I am on high alert and don’t even want to go to church anymore.
In reply to post and comments:
^^That
Not based on the commonly known scandals, although the methodology used has been the same…
High-profile pastor is exposed for committing adultery and loses ministry. Sin is minimized by calling it “a moral failure”. “Repents” and goes through couples counselling. Marriage “redeemed”. Pastor returns to another ministry. Everybody – including said pastor – oohhhss and aaahhhs about pastor’s “proof” of “how God forgives sinners”. Example of the whole process used to raise money.
Sigh.